From dev-return-40714-apmail-geronimo-dev-archive=geronimo.apache.org@geronimo.apache.org Thu Nov 02 19:09:08 2006
Return-Path:
Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Received: (qmail 2661 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2006 19:09:07 -0000
Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2)
by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Nov 2006 19:09:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 36318 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2006 19:09:15 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@geronimo.apache.org
Received: (qmail 36277 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2006 19:09:15 -0000
Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
list-help:
list-unsubscribe:
List-Post:
Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
List-Id:
Delivered-To: mailing list dev@geronimo.apache.org
Received: (qmail 36266 invoked by uid 99); 2 Nov 2006 19:09:15 -0000
Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133)
by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Nov 2006 11:09:15 -0800
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0
tests=SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of paulmcmahan@gmail.com designates 66.249.92.172 as permitted sender)
Received: from [66.249.92.172] (HELO ug-out-1314.google.com) (66.249.92.172)
by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Nov 2006 11:09:01 -0800
Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id m2so233415ugc
for ; Thu, 02 Nov 2006 11:08:40 -0800 (PST)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
s=beta; d=gmail.com;
h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
b=NF8oIoiwsIPcdf6KS6NgQQ9jXBNQ0ZqxR0OwI8dp1QPQg3LGERagMsAB/9WgFX0rgHGr6CJdWwjbhBopCh8hXVeD0vloatCkWatUvNpVTxMmvOZpMlLajSQ5scOt0DsDN7w39bHvqcVvjdcTZQUr3mAZS7in2Ocdt+1pnoD0Ncg=
Received: by 10.67.99.1 with SMTP id b1mr1211240ugm.1162494519539;
Thu, 02 Nov 2006 11:08:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.67.19.8 with HTTP; Thu, 2 Nov 2006 11:08:39 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <21df75940611021108m2f5c40a2o122b5e7b7599ff14@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 14:08:39 -0500
From: "Paul McMahan"
To: dev
Subject: Re: 1.2 Fit and Finish
In-Reply-To:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References:
<21df75940611010555m5db5ba98gcfc892ba98898a5d@mail.gmail.com>
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org
OK I had a hunch something might break but I figured I would ask
anyway just in case there was a way. For now I can probably
manufacture a reasonable test env on my local machine but as the
server gets more componentized as plugins I think it will become more
important to test the system as a whole before releasing. To me that
means base server, plugins, and plugin repos bits are all tested in
the same configuration that a user will see when the release is
announced.
BTW, we're close to the point where you can install the framework
assembly and then use the CLI to slurp in the admin console and all
its dependencies from the 1.2 plugin repo at
http://geronimo.apache.org/plugins/geronimo-1.2/. Looking forward
I'm excited about the new possibilities this opens up for us in how we
release.
Best wishes,
Paul
On 11/1/06, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
> It isn't really possible to publish a "1.2" release like that. It
> would break lots of stuff (like maven) that assumes that there will
> only ever be a single 1.2 release. Why can't you test against a 1.2-
> timestamp release?
>
> -dain
>
> On Nov 1, 2006, at 5:55 AM, Paul McMahan wrote:
>
> > One of the activities to coordinate when finalizing the release is
> > updating the 1.2 plugin repository catalog at:
> > http://geronimo.apache.org/plugins/geronimo-1.2/geronimo-plugins.xml
> > to point at a repo where the 1.2 artifacts are published instead of
> > the snapshot repo it currently points at. For testing purposes it
> > would be ideal to build Geronimo as version "1.2" (not "1.2rc1" or
> > "1.2.timestamp" or something like that) and publish the 1.2 artifacts
> > to a maven2 repo during the release candidate cycle. That would allow
> > us to test the plugin system in pretty much the exact state it will be
> > when 1.2 is released. Is that feasible? If not then we may need to
> > work out an alternate approach where the repository catalog gets
> > updated after the release goes out and the artifacts get published.
> > That makes me a little nervous though since it will be too late to
> > make changes to the server if something doesn't work right.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> > Paul
> >
> >
> > On 10/30/06, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
> >> In a typical Geronimo release we tend to spend a significant amount
> >> of time in what I'll call the "Fit and Finish" phase. This involves
> >> tying up loose ends such as log levels, tools L&F, startup times,
> >> licenses and so on. Basically, the phase includes fixing all the
> >> nits that cause people to vote -1 for a release (BTW no vetos in a
> >> release vote).
> >>
> >> Please, take a moment and respond to this email with any items you
> >> feel should be cleaned up before we release the software. That way
> >> we can hopefully get these items out in the open and addressed while
> >> we are finishing the TCK testing. Please note that just because an
> >> item is mentioned doesn't mean it must be completed before a
> >> release. The only thing required for a release it to successfully
> >> pass a vote of the PMC, so if the item is critical to you, spend a
> >> few minutes fixing it.
> >>
> >> With any luck we should be able to have the server ready to ship
> >> about the same time we finish the TCK testing.
> >>
> >> -dain
> >>
>
>